He makes the following comment:
"However, by far the most worrying part of a story that is sure to shock any right-thinking individual is the following:Is he right in what he says or is he just a scaremonger?
...officers have talked about selling the surveillance data to private companies. A prototype drone equipped with high-powered cameras and sensors is set to take to the skies for test flights later this year.
Expanding the level of surveillance in this country is bad. Doing it by sending unmanned drones into the skies to watch for petty pointless crimes like bad driving while the number of stabbings and shootings rise is worse. But to talk about selling the data these drones provide to private companies is absolutely outrageous.
If these plans succeed, not only will their use effectively turn Britain into a police state, in which every citizen can be closely monitored by those in authority, we will become a nation in fear of our government - the complete opposite of how a democracy is supposed to function."
An article appeared in the Daily Telegraph on the 5th January 2010 entitled (Number of crimes caught on CCTV falls by 70 per cent, Metropolitan Police admits) in which the point is made that;
"Prosecutions linked to CCTV have fallen in parts of Britain, raising questions about the true impact of the security cameras."The author Christopher Hope goes on to say
"Britain has the most CCTV cameras per head of any country in the world, with people said to be caught on camera as many as 300 times a day.If the effectiveness of CCTV cameras in the prevention and solving of crime is in doubt what is the benefit of police forces and other government bodies spending limited funds on these new expensive flying spies in the sky.
Figures released under the Freedom of Information Act to The Daily Telegraph show a 71 per cent fall in the number of crimes "in which CCTV was involved" in the Metropolitan Police area, from 416,000 in 2003/4 to 121,770 in 2008/9."
As is stated in the article;
"A report by a House of Lords committee last year found that £500 million was spent on new cameras in the 10 years to 2006, money which could have been spent on street lighting or neighbourhood crime prevention initiatives."
If the use for protection of the public from crime and criminals is in doubt, does that mean the main prerogative for these extra police and government eyes is for monitoring of UK citizens with the future objective of unnecessary levels of intrusion and controlof the lives of the UK citizens?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please be courteous and add your name rather than 'Anonymous' to your comment, as it may not be published. In the 'Comment as' box above use the drop-down menu and select 'Name/URL'. In the 'Edit profile' pop-up enter your name and press continue. There will be a period of delay before your comment appears on the article until I receive the automatic notification that you have made one and can authorised its publication.
Any comment that includes vulgar language, racist remarks or anything of that nature will either be edited or not published at my discretion.